Question of Day — Are 2nd Amendment rights not equal to squatters’ rights?

From CBS News, some news and a rewrite of history as to “immigration reform”:

A bipartisan group of leading senators has reached agreement on the principles of sweeping legislation to rewrite the nation’s immigration laws.

The deal, which was to be announced at a news conference Monday afternoon, covers border security, guest workers and employer verification, as well as a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.

Although thorny details remain to be negotiated and success is far from certain, the development heralds the start of what could be the most significant effort in years toward overhauling the nation’s inefficient patchwork of immigration laws….

The eight senators expected to endorse the new principles Monday are Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado; and Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and Jeff Flake of Arizona….

Several of these lawmakers have worked for years on the issue. McCain collaborated with the late Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on comprehensive immigration legislation pushed by then-President George W. Bush in 2007, only to see it collapse in the Senate when it couldn’t get enough GOP support.

That last paragraph is a rewrite of history. Immigration reform was killed because of poison pills put in the legislation by Democrats (including Barack Obama) supported by some Republicans (including Jim DeMint). Just another example of how the media, out of ignorance or worse, skews history to blame Republicans.

How big a payday this is for immigration crime depends on what the pathway to citizenship ends up being.

Regardless, it’s a payday because people who violated our laws to get here get to stay without consequence and get a pathway to citizenship. That pathway takes immigration reform from some sort of humanitarian and practical solution to rewarding illegality.

It makes suckers of all the people who followed the rules and are on the other side of the borders and oceans because they didn’t want to become criminals.

Once again we send the message that immigration crime pays. Apparently that is good politics.

Question of the Day — Will violators of gun laws not connected to commission of some other crime be given amnesty like immigration law violators? Or are 2nd Amendment rights not equal to squatters’ rights?

Update: By the way, the comparison to squatters’ rights is not something I thought up, it’s a theory advanced by former Cornell (and now U. Chicago) law professor Eduardo Peñalver, who has written a book on the contribution of squatters to the development of property law, and who views application of such theories as a positive development as related to immigration law:

The better analogy is with the twin doctrines of adverse possession and prescription. These doctrines, which are virtually universal in systems of private property, recognize that possession or use of property that goes on for a long enough period of time should eventually be recognized as legal, even if they were illegal when they began. In most states, even an act of intentional squatting will ripen into full-blown property ownership after roughly seven to ten years.

Keep in mind that the GOP can lose this in too ways .. it can pass a bad bill or walk away from a good bill

After listening around, I’m beginning to get the feeling that this “framework” may .. I stress may .. become a fairly decent bill.

I’m also beginning to sense that the Democrats are now trying to convince the GOP that it is a bad bill (since when has David Frum been right about anything). This allows them to show that they care more about Hispanics (but not those Mexicans that Fast and Furious helped get killed) and keep this thorny issue alive that pays dividends for Democrats at the polls.

So far this is merely a “framework” not a bill. I suggest that we find out what it really is before forming a judgement.

Well since our political class hasn’t done a damn thing about this since the last lame legislation passed back in the 1980’s I guess we reap what we sow. Now we have a much larger problem and a new found sense of bi-partisan will do try again. I say great. However all of the whining by those of us on the right have no right to complain as we are just as responsible for not proposing meaningful legislation as well. Check out Ed Morrissey’s balanced discussion at HotAir:

There are plenty of concessions to our cause and amnesty is the last of the pillars to be dealt with. Let’s give Rubio’s efforts a chance to succeed before we start the next round of GOP bashing. Border and visa issues have created the mess we are now in. Fix those first and clean up the mess we have allowed to occur last.

Dan : I agree with you. I like neither McCain or Graham. We need to back Rubio & Flake, both from border states. Mexico, like Canada is a neighbor hence worth some consideration. We cannot change the dynamic by keeping them at arms length. By treating Mexico & Hispanic people with respect it will impact both they & us obviously but many of them have been in our country longer than many of us. Remember it was James Polk, a Democrat, who by right of superior strength took a large piece of Mexico. He did it to make room for more slave states. The Republican party has allowed itself to be co-opted by the lie they are responsible for the history done by the mindset we have always stood against. It is well past time to reclaim our heritage in our battle against bigotry & now fascism. We will win in no other way. That includes a staunch defense of the second amendment & what it stands for.

Do you people really know what you’re talking about? Let’s get behind Flake, you say, oh yes, and Rubio. Flake is a Mormon, and he represents that cadre within Mormonism that sees big dollars for cheap labor. Marriott hotels, for example. Owned by Mormons who lobby against strict enforcement of the border so they can keep wages low, which hurt American workers. I stayed in a Marriott in Gaithersburg, Md. and the housekeeping staff had no idea what “an extra towel” was, and spoke Spanish in reply to my request. Numbers USA, back in 2007, had a secret camera at an event in D.C. hosted by a group instructing employers how to band together and take on Congress in an effort to force amnesty. And guess who was there? Representatives from Marriott!

These people care nothing about the rule of law, about national sovereignty, about the determined effort to implement one world government, you know, Soros’ Open Society, where free trade means free flow of workers across porous borders that once were homes to nations, races, cultures, and communities — with SHARED values. Flake and Rubio are globalists and have stuck their fingers in the air and declared that the future of America is to be part of a North-American Union, the segue to an Open Society.

You know what I want to hear from Flake? I want to hear him declare that the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act will be repealed and that we will return America to her roots in Western Civilization; that we will deport people who cross our borders illegally; that we will prosecute the Marriotts of America; that we will protect our heritage, our culture and OUR people.

And don’t even get me started on the nexus between these transnationalists and the OIC, pushing a global world caliphate.

Given demographics & reality, with your attitude we are guaranteed to lose. You can’t counter the lefts message by not being out there engaging the customer, presenting the product. You will of course get a lot of likes from the choir but that doesn’t expand the market. Your market is shrinking & your competition is defining your product. We need to change that to defeat fascism thru showing fellow Americans we want them as part of our free market basket of individual attainment.

This is reality: We’re being subsumed by a subversive element and a chorus of the clueless who believe that “individual attainment” — are you a libertarian, by the way — is the highest good. Oh, no, we must not tell the truth about what is happening to us. We must pretend that as long as we avoid the truth, stick to economics and a “free” market, that we may thereby attract the politically naive and they’ll help us rollback our march into absolute statism.

Please tell me how people who are happy in their ignorance and unaware of the dangers we face can be helpful in pushing back against tyrants? They wouldn’t even qualify as summer soldiers!

Behind your prescription is a defeated heart. Where is your fighting spirit? You remind me of John Boehner; you’ve already thrown up your hands. I hope I’m wrong about you.

Here is the “first step” towards the GOP’s attempt to play Democrat and pander to the Hispanics:

“Create a tough but fair path…contingent on securing our borders…”

Therein lies the rub. It all hinges on securing the border. But we all know that our border will never be secured, simply because the political will is not there to do so.

I have no doubt that, just as Reagan got burned in 1986, we are going down the same road – rewarding illegal entry to this country by awarding citizenship to eleven million people with little more than lip service towards border security.

Knowing that all you have to do is sneak in and wait, we should see tens of millions more illegal immigrants over the next decade.

I am still waiting to know what is so “broken” about our current immigration law, other than the fact that we don’t enforce them, instead preferring a source of renewable slave labor.

For my money, I would prefer to pay $6 for that head of lettuce, instead of the untold trillions of dollars required to provide health care, food, housing, and education to an endless stream of illegal immigrants.

I don’t have the confidence of some that the ruling class will follow the tenets outlined in the HotAir blog. There are too many potential Democratic voters in the mass of illegal immigrants to pass up the opportunity to offer blanket amnesty. Heck, here in Illinois, our ruling class (which has the worst financial rating in the country) signed into law a provision to give driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. The ruling class touted this as a “safety” issue because it would ensure that these folks would be properly tested before driving and carry insurance. And these same folks who have driven the state into the ditch financially, hold this up as an example of “leadership” on immigration reform.

Part of the problem with immigration is that many of the folks who are here illegally have no desire to become citizens. They want a chance to work and better themselves, but do not intend to stay here as citizens. This is the very nature of 21st century immigration. All you have to do is look at the lines at various consulates when other countries are having elections. Or look at the flags on Polish constitution Day or Mexican Independence Day.

Lastly, while the thought that the ruling class might actually do the right thing and ensure that illegal immigrants follow a set of rules to get in line properly, you know well that anyone who has had a child born in this country will get a free pass. The first thing that immigration rights folks do when someone gets deported is to drag out the sad faced children who were born here and now have a deported parent.

Yup. I have good friends who are Green Card holders (after much(!!!) time and $$$ spent), other friends who are LEGAL resident aliens on H-1 visas (eagerly looking forward to a chance for citizenship) and still other dear friends who lawfully and regretfully (with many tears) returned to their countries when their H-1 visas expired in hopes of a follow-on job-related return trip that might give them another shot at eventual U.S. citizenship.

Irks the ever-lovin’ heck out of me to see THAT happen and yet see Dems AND RINOs fall all over themselves trying to secure the eternal vote of these eternally-dependent “future Dem voters” with one Government “gimme” bribe after another.

We really need to repeal the 17th Amendment. States have absolutely no representation in the federal government. You can’t tell me that if these prima donnas had to answer to a state legislature, even one as corrupt as Illinois’, they would be quite as enraptured with themselves.

Dick Durbin is up for reelection next, and he’s not going anywhere. In a state like Illinois, or New York for that matter, the population crush around the one major city dilutes the voting strength of the rest of the state. State legislatures, hence the stares as entities within a federal system, have zero representation as it stands…they are reduced to dependent latchers-on to the federal money teat.

Obama was elected because the Republican Party in the Land of Lincoln is beyond moribund. The democrats are corrupt. Great combo here.

In a think fog, people used to conclude that Republicans were merely stupid. The air has cleared, thanks to Boehner’s blatant pandering to Progressives (and his neutering of conservative freshmen) and to constant the clamoring of the Bushes and Rubios of the party to out-do the liberalism of their Democrat counterparts.

My this venomous post is quite out of character for Prof. Jacobson. It is a serious error for a law professor to call those who overstay their visa period criminals. Why not call zoning and building code violators criminals, or better yet, put a “criminal” label on every one of us who have benefited from the landscapers, drywallers, painters, launderers, dishwashers, maids and domestic helpers who are illegals.

As I recall my history, Bush 43 saw the electoral folly of deporting millions of latinos and proposed a 5 year guest worker status — but conservatives were too offended to cooperate. Legal latino voters are a large faction and are the fasted growing faction; every one of them knows an immigrant suddenly deported leaving a spouse and children unsupported. It was Bush that was getting this voting segment to split almost evenly between left and right. Conservatives have fixed that demographic for at least a generation. So go ahead and wring your hands while spewing contempt for the immigrant poor, it keeps reinforcing conservatism’s appeal to swing voters.

Prof Jacobson knows that that being an undocumented alien is not a crime, and it is not handled by criminal courts (just like building code violations are not crimes). Labeling illegals “criminals” foments more displays of contempt for the immigrant poor and reinforces our unattractiveness to swing voters.

“Why not call zoning and building code violators criminals (1), or better yet, put a “criminal” label on every one of us who have benefited from the landscapers, drywallers, painters, launderers, dishwashers, maids and domestic helpers who are illegals.(2)”

1. We do becaue they violate building codes in place to protect themselves and others, and
2. we do, and if you have, you are. The one thing pols do repeatedly in their “fight” is write laws making it illegal to hire illegals. Of course, it is mostly a pardonable oversight when one of them does it, proclaims ignorance, and “apologizes.”

Otherwise, the “fight” consists mostly of toothless, unfunded, lip service to the very laws they pass. Lip service is what they do. Amnesty is the only thing any of them have the stomach for because it requires no enforcement, there are no consequences for anyone, and they’ve made more people happy than unhappy. This isn’t about illegals, it’s about the politicians, which accounts for its universal popularity among them. Their biggest problem is deciding who gets his name on the bill.

1. Some cursory googling left me pretty sure that Mark is not a troll. Of course, O Real Conservatives™, cue sinister music you know what defending Mark makes me…

2. OT: Afaic the commented blogosphere is on the way to being unreadable. The notion that good speech is the antidote to bad speech sounds fine in principle; in practice, good speech takes time and care to construct whereas bad speech is much easier to spew out. Gresham’s Law.

Walter Russell Mead addressed the problem by cancelling comments. Mead, however, is not an activist. How to run an activist site which accommodates legitimate dissent but screens out crazies & trolls is an open problem.

3. I disagree with Mark for at least two reasons. First, our host’s post does not strike me as especially venomous. Second, IMO the biggest problem is not people who overstay visas; the biggest problem is people who illegally cross the border.

4. I have to respect people who take those kinds of risks in search of a better life. My inclination to goodwill is outweighed by the country’s obligation to people who are already here as lawful citizens.

5. One of my pet peeves is: there is not nearly enough anger at the American malefactors, in and out of government, who expedite the entry of the illegals. I suspect that agribusiness corporatists—and they’re not the only ones—are playing rank and file conservatives for suckers.

I don’t mind thoughtful disagreement, and I appreciate the google search regarding troll postures. Also, I didn’t say anything about supporting open borders, I’m not opposed to installing walls, moats, fences and cameras to control border access. The blatant contempt conservatives display for illegals who are already here, many for decades, has been an electoral disaster. Conservatives would be more attractive if they curried the favor of legal latino voters by showing more tolerance toward the undocumented immigrant poor, and reserved their contempt for the completely unworkable green card quota system (you know, the one that didn’t exist when Prof Jacobson’s “Vite” grandma got in along with most of our grandparents and great grandparents). But in this matter, emotion trumps logic for conservatives; go figure.

Everybody seems to be deliberately ignoring two key points. The outline released by the Incumbency Party in our House of Lords has this:

Four Basic Legislative Pillars:

1. Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

2. Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

3. Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

We have played this game before, and have been …. well, here I cannot use the appropriate phrase, so insert your own. Let us say that the best way to judge the veracity of the contingency is to look at how secure our borders are after the same freaking people on both sides of the mythical aisle made the same promises the last couple of times.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. This is at least the third time for the same lies.

Just to narrow it down, let me give the most obvious way that they will cheat. We have not had a constitutional budget for 5 years, and the Institutional Republicans not only have not been able force the production of one; they have refused to even try. One to three times a year at least, the Institutionals collapse crying and give the Democrats everything they want. We have had 3 such collapses since Congress came back after the election, and know of at least two more coming [the Continuing Resolution and the Sequestration].

So how can we expect to get the legal changes and funding for the “secure borders” through the Senate when they refuse to bring it up after the overarching “reform” is passed? It is not going to happen, and the Republicans are not even going to fight for it.

The fate of immigration reform, then, largely rests on what this commission looks like, who is on it, and what metric it uses to decide when the border is secure. At first glance, doesn’t this basically constitute giving people like Arizona Governor Jan Brewer veto power over when the citizenship process begins? Many immigration advocates argue the border is already secure, but Republicans continue to insist it isn’t, raising the question of whether this commission will ever acknowledge that border security has been achieved. And if this “commission” doesn’t ever decide the border is secure, couldn’t that result in 11 million people being stranded in second-class legal limbo?

That’s a legitimate worry, according to Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, a group advocating for immigration reform. But he tells me that on a conference call yesterday, Democratic Senators reassured immigration advocates that this commission won’t be constructed in a way that will hold up the process for too long.

As Sharry put it, Democrats realize that they can’t “allow the commission to have a real veto” over setting in motion the path to citizenship. He noted that Dems see the commission as “something that gives the Republicans a talking point” to claim they are prioritizing tough enforcement, giving themselves cover to back a process that “won’t stop people from getting citizenship.” However, Sharry added: “The details of this are going to matter hugely, and we’ll have to fight like hell on the individual provisions.”

The Institutional Republicans know the whole thing is a sham, and they are going along with it.

The only proper course of action would be for Republicans to fight this tooth and nail, and bring up the “securing the border” as a stand alone process. After that is done, then we can talk. The Republicans, of course, will run screaming in horror from the idea of actually doing something for the country if it means a cross word from the Democrats.

In the one-party State we have become, obeying the law is a mug’s game.

As I understand it, the GOP congressional leadership wants to cave on these lesser issues to get them off the table so they can move forward to cave on the real issues affecting our troubled economy: debt, deficits, spending, tax reform, etc.

2. My long-term nagging suspicion is that (one reason why) legal immigration does not get reformed (is) because government knows full well it is too incompetent to do a professional job of regulating immigration. Cases in point: FEMA, TSA.

It’s quite possible that you’d have to fire everybody in that bureaucracy and start from scratch (perhaps building around a cadre of ex-military), and that’s politically out of the question.